9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (7) TMI 380X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orrect. He also brought a turnover of Rs. 4,00,012 for assessment as it related to local purchases of raw hides and skins within Tamil Nadu. Penalty proceedings was also initiated to levy a penalty of Rs. 12,000. 2. The assessee contended that the revision was barred by limitation and that there was no jurisdiction for the Deputy Commissioner to enhance a turnover of Rs. 4,00,012, which was not considered by the assessing officer at the time of original assessment. 3.. The Tribunal on hearing the arguments of both sides and after perusal of the records, has held that the revision is within the period of limitation prescribed under amended section 32 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and accordingly, it rejected the plea of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the assessment for the purpose of re-doing the assessment. The original assessment for the assessment year 1976-77 was made on February 28, 1978. Limitation for exercising power under section 32 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act would end by February 28, 1983. In between this period, the Deputy Commissioner issued a notice dated January 19, 1983, for reopening the assessment. While exercising his suo motu power, the Deputy Commissioner can direct the assessing officer to reopen the assessment if there is time-limit for reopening. While directing the assessing officer to reopen the assessment, the Deputy Commissioner is also bound by the provisions contained in section 16(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. According to secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng officer, viz., Rs. 2,31,237.83, addition was made since objection was not made by the assessee. When the reassessment is hit by the period of limitation, the escaped turnover cannot be brought to tax and no penalty proceedings can also be initiated. 6.. In A. Valayutha Raja v. Board of Revenue (C.T.), Madras-5 [1970] 26 STC 176, this Court held as under: "The provisions as to the period of limitation within which escaped turnover can be brought to tax as provided in section 16(1) equally apply when such an order is sought to be passed by the Board in exercise of its powers under section 34. The effect of the period of limitation envisaged in section 16(1) is wide enough and cannot be said to be limited to assessment of escaped turnover ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
